Soniya @ Soniya Gandhi v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Peravurani
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 11/06/2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Soniya @ Soniya Gandhi ... Petitioner/Sole Accused Vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep by, The Inspector of Police, Peravurani Police Station, Thanjavur.
Crime No.271/2026. ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.271/2026 on the file of the Respondent Police.
For Petitioner : K.Dinesh, Advocate.
For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER : The Court made the following order :- 1/6
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 118(1) & 351(2) of BNS Act, 2023, in Crime No.271 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is the granddaughter of the defacto complainant. The defacto complainant mocked the defacto complainant for not getting married. Due to which, the petitioner attacked the defacto complainant with a stick. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioner is an innocent and has was falsely implicated in this case and he has no way connected in the above said incident. He would further submit that the injured was discharged from the hospital and no previous case is pending against the petitioner. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that the petitioner attacked the complainant with a stick and caused 2/6
injury and the investigation is still pending. Hence, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. He would further submit that the injured was discharge from the hospital and the petitioner has no previous case.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
6. Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioner, and the relationship between the parties i.e., the petitioner is none other than the grand-daughter of the defacto complainant and the injured was discharged from the hospital and the petitioner has no previous case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate Court, 3/6
Peravurani, and on further conditions that:
[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police, every Saturday at 10.30 a.m. for a period of four weeks, and thereafter as and when required for the interrogation.
[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature.
[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.
[e] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.
4/6
11.06.2026 dss To 1.The District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Peravurani. 2.The Inspector of Police, Peravurani Police Station, Thanjavur.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
5/6
P. DHANABAL,J dss
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.10821 of 2026 Date : 11/06/2026 6/6